Suit Seeks Relief for Violation of Chinese Consumer Protection Law on Behalf of Pet Owners Impacted by Melamine Poisoning

SAN FRANCISCO, Aug. 8 /PRNewswire/ — The law firm of Audet & Partners, LLP has filed a class action lawsuit against Binzhou Futian Biological Technology, Co., Ltd., a company based in Binzhou, China, seeking relief under the laws of the People’s Republic of China and California. The complaint, filed in California State Superior Court (San Francisco) (Case #: CGC-07-465924), seeks damages and other relief arising from injuries to pet owners whose dogs and cats became sick or died from ingesting melamine.

As alleged in the complaint, the named plaintiff’s beloved cat died due to complications associated with melamine poisoning from pet food. “It’s time to hold all companies, regardless of the location of the business, financially and legally accountable for distributing toxic materials into the United States stream of commerce,” said lead attorney William M. Audet, managing partner of Audet & Partners, LLP.

“Our firm’s legal research has revealed that the law in the People’s Republic of China actually provides for potential liability for distributing ‘impure or fake materials’ in products such as dog and cat food,” said Attorney Audet. “We intend to argue that the China-based company is liable under both California law and applicable Chinese law.”

The complaint asserts class-wide claims against Binzhou Futian Biological Technology under the provision of the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Protection of Rights and Interests of Consumers and under the Consumer Protection provisions of the law of the State of California.

As a separate cause of action against the Chinese-based company, the complaint asserts a claim based on law adopted Oct. 31, 1993 by the Fourth Session of the Standing Committee of the Eighth National People’s Congress. Legal research indicates this may be the first-of-its-kind claim, but as noted by Attorney Audet, “While the claim may be the first of its kind, our client’s ability to obtain relief is consistent with well-established law in the United States.”